jml commented (on PJ's writing about rodent to whale):
-------------------
It is important - if one is attempting to "defeat darwin" as Johnson is,
you
cannot erect a straw-man by using out-dated information. It's not good
scholarship and wouldn't get him tenure in any field (even law!).
------------------------
If this is the worst people can write about PJ, it does not seem
important to me. If it does to you, so be it. I had one offline email
from a member here agreeing with that position, but he/she thought the
whole issue was a tempest in a teapot and declined to be involved.
-----------------------
jml continued:
----------------
Whether or not PEJ believes that whales came from rodents, he (i) should
have realized no evolutionists make that claim, and (ii) should have
refrained from using such an absurd example - it only seeks to bias his
readers. Given the rhetorical tricks lawyers are famed for (and Johnson
being a representative example), it not a surprise that he would not give
the real hypothesis about whale origins, after all, it's not as crazy as
his
version.
------------------
There are lawyers and then there are lawyers. Damning PJ because he is a
lawyer is bad logic. Abe Lincoln was a lawyer too.

Burgy (who has a daughter who manages her own law firm)

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.